Skip to main content

Full text of "Annual report for the year ..."

See other formats


'¥' .^ 

84th Congress, 1st Session 

Union Calendar No. 19 

House Report No. 57 



JANUARY 26, 1955 

(Original Release Date) 

February 16, 1955.— Comrnitted to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
State of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Prepared and released by the 
Committee on L'n-American Activities, U. S. House of Representatives 

Washington, D. C. 


United States House of Representatives 

HAROLD H. VELDB, Illinois, Chairman 

'4 BERNARD W. KEARNEY, New York FRANCIS E. WALTER, Pennsylvania 

'' DONALD L. JACKSON, California MORGAN M. MOULDER, Missouri 

KIT CLARDY, Michigan CLYDE DOYLE, California 


ROBEKT L. KuNZiG, Coiinsel 

Frank S. Tavennee, Jr., Counsel 

Thomas W. Bealb, Sr., Chief Clerk 

Raphael I. Nixon, Director of Research 

COUBTNET E. Owens, Chief Investigator 

Union Calendar No. 19 

84x11 Congress ) HOUSE OF EEPEESENTATIYES ( Report 
1st Session ) I Ko. 57 


February 1G, 1955. — Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
State of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. Velde of Illinois, from the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, submitted the following 


[Pursuant to H. Res. 5, S4th Cong.] 




Foreword 1 

Investis^ation of Communist activities in various cities and States: 

Albany, N. Y 3 

The Baltimore area 4 

State of California 5 

Chicago, 111 6 

Dayton, Ohio, area 7 

District of Columbia 14 

Florida 14 

Michigan 14 

Pacific Nortliwest area: 

Seattle. 18 

Portland 18 

Philadelphia 21 

Recommendations based upon investigations and hearings in the year 1954. 22 


Public Law 601, YOth Congress 

The legislation under wliicli the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities operates is Public Law 601, T9th Congress [1946], chapter 
T53, 2d session, which provides : 

Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States 
of America in Congress assembled, * * * 


Rule X 

• **♦♦** 

17. Committee on Un-American Activities, to consist of nine members. 

Rule XI 


(q) (1) Committee on Un-American Activities. 

(A) Un-American activities. 

(2) Tlie Committee on Un-American Activities, as a whole or by subcommit- 
tee, is authorized to mal^e from time to time investigations of (i) the extent, 
cliaracter, and objects of un-American propaganda activities in the United States, 
(ii) the diffusion within the United States of subversive and un-American propa- 
ganda that is instigated from foreign countries or of a domestic origin and attacliS 
the principle of the form of government as guaranteed by our Constitution, and 
(iii) all other questions in relation thereto that would aid Congress in any 
necessary remedial legislation. 

The Committee on Un-American Activities shall report to the House (or to the 
Clerk of the House if the House is not in session) the results of any such investi- 
gation, together with such recommendations as it deems advisable. 

For the purpose of any such investigation, the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or any subcommittee thereof, is authorized to sit and act at such 
times and places within the United States, whether or not the House is sitting, 
has recessed, or has adjourned, to hold such hearings, to require the attendance 
of such witnesses and the production of such books, papers, and documents, and 
to take such testimony, as it deems necessary. Subpenas may be issued under 
the signature of the chairman of the committee or any subcommittee, or by any 
member designated by any such chairman, and may be served by any person 
designated by any such chairman or member. 


House Resolution 5, January 3, 1953 

Rule X 


1. There shall be elected by the House, at the commencement of each Con- 
gress, the following standing committees : 

« « 4: * 4: 4c «t 

(q) Committee on Un-American Activities, to consist of nine members. 

4c 4i 4: :J: 9|i ^ lit 

Rule XI 


17. Committee on Un-American Activities. 

(a) Un-American Activities. 

(b) The Committee on Un-American Activities, as a whole or by subcommittee, 
is authorized to make from time to time, investigations of (1) the extent, char- 
acter, and objects of un-American propaganda activities in the United States, 
(2) the diffusion within the United States of subversive and un-American prop- 
aganda that is instigated from foreign countries or of a domestic origin and 
attacks the principle of the form of government as guaranteed by our Constitu- 
tion, and (3) all other questions in relation thereto that would aid Congress 
in any necessary remedial legislation. 

The Committee on Un-American Activities shall report to the House (or to the 
Clerk of the House if the House is not in session ) the results of any such investi- 
gation, together with such recommendations as it deems advisable. 

For the purpose of any such investigation, the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or any subcommittee thereof, is authorized to sit and act at such times 
and places within the United States, whether or not the House is sitting, has 
recessed, or has adjourned, to hold such hearings, to require the attendance 
of such witnesses and the production of such books, papers, and documents, and 
to take such testimony, as it deems necessary. Subpenas may be issued under 
the signature of the chairman of the committee or any subcommittee, or by any 
member designated by such chairman, and may be served by any person desig- 
nated by any such chairman or member. 




This Annual l\oport of the Committee on Un-American Activities 
for the year 1954 is submitted to the House of Representatives in com- 
pliance with that section of Public Law 601 (79th Cong.) which pro- 
vides : '"The Committee on Un-American Activities shall report to the 
House (or to the Clerk of the House, if the House is not in session) 
the results of any such investigation, together with such recommenda- 
tions as it deems advisable." 

During the year 1954, the Committee on L^n- American Activities 
held hearings in Albany, K Y.; Chicago, HI.; Dayton, Ohio; Flint 
and Lansing, Mich.; San Diego, Calif.; Seattle, Wash.; Portland, 
Oreg. ; Miami, Fla.; as well as numerous hearings in Washington, 
D. C. By holding hearings in these various cities throughout the 
country, the committee was able to secure the informed testimony of 
a great many more witnesses than would have been possible had hear- 
ings been held only in Washington, D. C. These on-the-spot hearings 
also provided another benefit by giving thousands of American citizens 
their first view of the operations of a committee of their Congress. 

The committee is proud to report that in every instance where 
hearings were conducted throughout the country, the public and the 
press heartily endorsed the committee's operations. The vital nature 
of the committee's work and the fairness of the committee proceedings 
served to dispel a great many erroneous impressions that had been 
created in many places relative to this committee. 

The House Committee on Un-American Activities, in its official 
function during the 83d Congress, called before it in either public or 
executive session nearly 600 witnesses. As in previous Congresses, the 
majority of these witnesses refused to furnish the committee the infor- 
mation they were alleged or known to possess concerning subversive 
activities ; however, a greater number of witnesses than ever before did 
give the committee testimony concerning their personal involvements 
in subversive groups. The number of pages of factual testimony 
received by the committee during the 8od Congress is approximately 
twice as great as that received by it during any preceding Congress. 

In order that these witnesses might be heard and their testimony 
recorded under oath, it has been necessary for the members of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities to devote an unprecedented 
amount of time to their duties with this committee. 

Over the past IG years the House committee, as well as the Special 
Committee on Un-American Activities, has made numerous recom- 
mendations for the enactment of new legislation or the strengthening 
of existing laws dealing with subversive activities. Over all of this 
time the members of these committees recognized that legislation deal- 
ing with the internal security of our great Nation was woefully inade- 
quate. It was not until 1950 that the Congress realized the necessity 

5500S 1 


for immediate legislation. In that year, after extensive legislative 
hearings by the House Committee on Un-American Activities, com- 
menced in 1947, Congress passed the Internal Security Act of 1950 
(McCarran-Wood Act). This vital legislation is still, after 4 years, 
undergoing the tedious but necessary court tests to establish its con- 
stitutionality. The committee noted with interest the recent finding 
of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit, which decision confirmed the findings of the Subversive 
Activities Control Board that the Commmiist Party must register and 
conform to other provisions of the Internal Security Act. 

During 1954 the House of Representatives implemented by legisla- 
tion a number of past recommendations of the Committee on Un- 
American Activities. The committee in its annual report for the year 

1953 detailed the past recommendations made by this committee and 
the Special Committee on Un-American Activities. It is worthy of 
note that at the commencement of 1954 all but 8 of the committee's 47 
recommendations had been favorably acted upon by Congress or the 
executive branch. 

Early in 1954 the Attorney General of the United States advised 
the Congress that certain legislation was considered necessary to 
strengthen effectively the national security. Four of these recom- 
mendations by the Attorney General were embraced within those 
previously made by the committee. These were for capital punish- 
ment in instances of espionage committed in time of peace ; immunity 
for certain witnesses appearing before duly authorized Federal bodies ; 
for the admissibility of evidence secured by wiretapping or teclmical 
devices; and for legislation to break Communist coutrol over certain 
labor unions. The Congress in 1954 passed and the President signed 
into law three of these recommendations originally proposed by this 
committee and subsequently requested by the Attorney General. A 
law permitting the use of evidence secured by technical devices in 
cases involving espionage and matters relating to internal security 
passed the House but did not obtain approval in the Senate, 

On the basis of hearings and investigations, the committee during 

1954 issued several reports to the Congress and the American people. 
The first of these reports was "Colonization of America's Basic Indus- 
tries by the Communist Party of the U. S. A." This report reflects 
the committee's findings on the Communist Party's endeavors to se- 
cure a foothold in the vital basic industries of this country. The 
committee points out in this report that the Communist Party had 
directed its intellectuals and white-collar workers to leave employment 
in their own chosen fields and to obtain positions in industries vital 
to defense, such as steel, electricity, and the maritime. In many cases, 
persons were required to leave their homes and travel to distant cities 
in order to carry out this Communist directive. The committee issued 
this report to warn and alert the Congress and the industries involved 
regarding these efforts by the Communist Party in the United States. 

The committee also released for the information of the Congress and 
the American public a booklet on the background and work of the 
committee entitled, "This Is Your House Committee on Un-American 
Activities." The booklet contained 116 questions and answers relative 
to the work of tlie committee, together with considerable statistical 
data on matters pertaining to the various aspects of the committee and 


its functions. An effort vras made to provide answers to the many 
questions that Members of Congress and the committee have been 
asked re<2:ardino: the committee. Due to tlie heavy demand for tlie 
booklet, the limited supply was almost immediately exhausted. 

In the annual report of the Committee on Un-American Activities 
for the year 1953, it was noted that the committee was engaged in a 
continuing study and investigation of the activities of groups which, 
Avhile posing as super-patriotic defenders of "life, liberty, and the 
pursuit of happiness,'' were in reality neofascist or "hate" groups. 
Eecognizing the threat posed by the activities of racist hatemongers, 
the committee instructed the staff to prepare a preliminary report on 
this subject. After a comprehensive study by the committee staff, the 
members approved the release of a "Preliminary Report on Neo- 
Fascist and Hate Groups.*' The report by no means exposes all of the 
facets of this problem, but rather deals with two glaring examples, one 
a neofascist and the other a "hate" group. The committee found that 
the National Renaissance Party was an open and avowed fascist 
group and the Department of Justice was requested to ascertain 
whether prosecution of its leaders under the provisions of the Smith 
Act was possible. 

One of the most frequent of the many false claims made by the 
Communist Party is that it has had appreciable success in its efforts 
to recruit members from among American Negroes. In order to es- 
tablish the falsity of these claims the committee prepared and released 
a report entitled, "The American Negro in the Communist Party." 
This report reflects the testimony of witnesses eminently qualified to 
furnish information relative to the Communist Party's efforts to 
infiltrate and gain control over American citizens of the Negro race. 
The committee found great satisfaction in being able to report that 
the Communist Party has had but infinitesimal success in its recruit- 
ment efforts among the 15 million American Negroes. 

The committee also reported the details of an exhaustive investiga- 
tion and hearings relating to a pujolication, which while posing as a 
legitimate trade-union journal, is in reality nothing more than a 
mouthpiece for Communist propaganda. The "Rei^ort on the March 
of Labor" clearly establishes the Communist "front" character of that 

In addition to the hearings and reports of the committee during 
1954, there has been continued the singularly valuable service provided 
to Members of Congress, congressional committees, and duly author- 
ized agencies of the Federal Government by the committee's files and 
reference service. With the ever-increased interest aroused by the 
expanded knowledge of subversive activities, there has been a propor- 
tionate increase in requests for information from the committee. 


Albany, N. Y. 

The House Committee on Un-American Activities commenced hear- 
ings in Albany, N. Y., in July 1953, which dealt principally with the 
strong efforts of the Communist Party to infiltrate the important area 
of Albany, N. Y., and the New York State government. 

H. Kept. 57, S4-1 2 


On April 7 through April 9, 1954, a subcommittee of the Com- 
mittee on Un-American Activities resumed hearings in Albany, deal- 
ing principally with Communist infiltration of vital defense industries 
and education within the capital area and throughout the State of 
New York and adjacent States. 

The committee was furnished valuable testimony by John Patrick 
Charles, John Edward Marqusee, Emmanuel Ross Eichardson, Joseph 
Klein, and Jack Davis, all of whom testified concerning not only Com- 
munist activities in the Albany area, but also throughout New York 
State and bordering States. i3oth Mr. Charles and Mr. Richardson, 
until 1950 and 1953, respectively, were undercover agents in the Com- 
munist Party for the FBI. Some 14 other persons identified as having 
been members of the Communist Party appeared before the connnittee 
and refused to answer conunittee questions, claiming the privilege of 
the fif til amendment. 

Mr. Leo Jandreau, former business agent for United Electrical 
Radio and Machine Workers of America, Local 301, General Electric 
Workers, Schenectady, N. Y., who at the time of his testimony was 
business agent for IUP2-CI0, Local 301, testified that he had never 
been a member of the Communist Party. 

Mr. Bernhard Deutch was identified as having been a member of 
a graduate group of tlie Communist Party while attending a promi- 
nent university in upper New York State (Cornell). Mr. Deutch was 
subpenaed before the committee in Washington, D. C, on April 12, 
1954, and questioned concerning his knowledge relative to his Com- 
munist Party membership and associations. He testified that he had 
been a member of the Communist Party until about the summer of 
1953. However, he also stated "To a great extent, it is only fair to 
say, I am a INIarxist today — I don't want to deny that." Aside from 
mentioning his own Communist Party membership, he refused to 
give the committee the benefit of liis knovvledge and information con- 
cerning his Communist Party activities and associations. 

Thereafter, on May 11, 1954, after unanimous vote by the committee 
itself, the House of I^epresentatives, by vote of 346 to 0, cited Bernard 
Deutch for contempt of Congress. 

The Baltimore Area 

During July 1953, a subcommittee holding hearings in New York 
City received testimony from Mr. Leonard Patterson, a former mem- 
ber of tlie Communist Party and the Young Communist League. 

In this testimony Mr. Patterson related that during 1935, while he 
was an organizer for the Young Communist League in Baltimore, 
two voung ministers had visited the Communist Party headquarters in 
Baltimore, Md. Mr. Patterson was unable to recall the names of these 
young men but did recall that tliey informed him that they were 
graduates of Union Theological Seminary in New York City, and 
that they had but recently arrived in Baltimore to take up ministerial 
assignments, and that the purpose of their visit to Communist Party 
headquarters was to ascertain whether the Communist Party had need 
of their services in that city. Acting upon the basis of this testimony 
the Committee on Un-iVmerican Activities directed that an investi- 
gation be conducted to ascertain the facts relating to this situation. 
As a result of this investigation, the committee received the testi- 
mony of Mr. Earl Reno. Mr. Reno advised that he was a past 


member of the Communist Party and that during the period of 
1935 he was an organizer for the Communist Party in Baltimore, 
]\Id. He recounted that frequently during this period he used the 
assumed Communist Party name of Earl Dixon. He also recalled that 
two 3'oung theological graduates had come to Communist Party head- 
quarters and oli'ered their services to the Communist Party. It was his 
recollection that they had both stated that they had previously par- 
ticipated in Communist Party work in New York City. Heno stated 
that he had discouraged either of them from taking out actual mem- 
bership in the Communist Party but accepted their assistance in help- 
ing such Communist Party fronts as the Ethiopian Defense Com- 
mittee and the American League Against "War and Fascism. He 
recalled that he had often used them to make speeches in different 
street-corner gatherings in Baltimore. 

In the course of the investigation the committee heard the testimony 
of Eev. Joseph Xowak, at which time he admitted that he was one of 
the two ministers referred to by Patterson and Reno. He admitted 
going to the Communist Party headquarters on several occasions and 
assisting Mr. Patterson in the development of the Ethiopian Defense 
Committee and the American League xVgainst "War and Fascism, and 
that he had become an official of the latter organization. 

Eeverend Xowak identified Eev. John Hutchison as the other min- 
ister who accompanied him to the Communist Party headquarters in 
August 1935. Eeverend Xowak testified that while he followed the 
Communist Party line and worked closely with the Communist Party 
during the period he was in Baltimore, Md., he had not actually be- 
come a member of the Communist Party until May 1940 in Chicago, 111. 

On March 18, 1951:, Eev. John Hutchison testified before the com- 
mittee and emphatically denied accompanying the Eeverend Xowak 
to the office of the Conmiunist Party in Baltimore, Md., in August 
of 1935. He denied ever having visited the office of the Communist 
Party and denied ever having known Mr. Leonard Patterson or Mr. 
Earl Eeno, either by that name or the name of Earl Dixon. As a re- 
sult of the obvious discrepancy in the testimony of these individuals 
the committee referred all of the testimony relating to this situation 
to the Department of Justice for its consideration as to perjury. 

State of Califorxia (San Diego) 

Over the past few years the Committee on LTn- American Activities 
has held hearings relating to Communist activities in the State of 
California, particularly centering in the areas of Los Angeles and San 
Francisco. During 1951 a subcommittee held hearings relating to 
Communist activities in the San Diego, Calif., area. 

The committee added to its wealth of sworn testimony, which will 
assist it in its legislative functions, a considerable volume of informa- 
tion furnished by many witnesses who related their experiences as 
past Communist Party members in San Diego.: 

One of the most significant developments of the hearings held in 
San Diego rests in the fact that as a result of the hearings which were 
televised, several persons viewing the importance and fairness of the 
subcommittee operations voluntarily approached the committee in 
order that they might furnish information concerning their own Com- 
munist Party activities and the knowledge they had thereby acquired, 


The following persons gave testimony of great value to the w^ork 

of the committee in its investigation of Communist activities in the 

State of California : 

Ackerstein, Lynn Sept. 17, 1954. 

Adams, George Richard Earl Sept. 17, 1954, 

Bayme, Carol Apr. 21, 1954. 

Eerman, Mildred Apr. 20, 1054. 

Berniau, Philip Apr. 19, 1954. 

Dunkel, John Apr. 23, 1954. 

Gatewood, Ernestine Apr. 22, 1954. 

Gatlin, Gladys Apr. 21, 1954. 

Haddock, Benjamin Holmes Ftb. 1, 1954. 

Hagau, Oliver "Red" Apr. 20, 1954. 

Hamlin, Lloyd Apr. 21 and 22, 1954. 

Hancock, Stanley B Feb. 24 and Mar. 1, 1954. 

Lang, John 20, 1954. 

Eavetch, Irving Apr. 23, 1954. 

Eaymond, Judith Sept. 11, 1953 (released in 1954). 

Smith, Tony Apr. 21, 19.54, 

Sumner, Merton D Apr. 12, 1954. 

Sykes, Artie Apr. 22, 19.54. 

Taylor, Daniel Pomeroy Apr. 19, 19.54. 

Wereb, Stephen Apr. 20, 1954 

Chicago, III. 

In March 1954, a subcommittee held hearings in Chicago, 111. In 
part these hearings were a result of the continued investigation of 
Communist Party activities in the Chicago area which had been 
commenced by the committee in 1952. 

The subcommittee received testimony in elaboration and corrobora- 
tion of previous testimony relative to the Communist control of the 
Farm Equipment Workers of the United Electrical, Radio, and Ma- 
chine AVorkers of America (FE-UE). This testimony was furnished 
the committee by Mr. Walter W. Rmnsey. In the course of this testi- 
mony Mr. Eumsey identified as a Communist, John T. Watkins, who 
has served as an official of the United Farm Equipment and Metal 
Workers before and after its expulsion from the CIO. The Com- 
mittee investigators endeavored to locate Mr. Watkins as well as 
Abe Feinglass, another union official who had been identified as a 
member of the Communist Party. These eit'orts were unsuccessful 
and Mr. Watkins and Mr. Feinglass were heard later in Washington, 
D. C. In view of Mr. Watkins' denial of Communist Party member- 
ship and his refusal to answer questions concerning individuals known 
to him as being members of the Communist Party, the committee voted 
to refer all testimony relating to this matter to the Department of 
Justice for possible perjury prosecution and the Congress subsequently 
approved the committee's recommendation that Mr. Watkins be cited 
for contempt of Congress. 

Also during the course of hearings held in Chicago, valuable testi- 
mony was received from Sheldon O. Collen, who recounted his ex- 
periences in the Communist Party while a student at Carleton College, 
Minnesota, and at the Law School, University of Chicago. 

The committee received testimony concerning the Communist 
Party's early infiltration in farmers organizations and Communist 
Party front activities from Mrs. Helen Wood Birnie. 

This subcommittee also had as a witness before it Mr. Vernon Todd 


Vernon Todd Riley was an employee of the Federal Government 
from 1942 to 1954. In December 1948, Riley was afforded his first 
hearing before an agency loyalty hearing board. Transcripts of these 
and subsequent hearings afforded Riley were turned over to the com- 
mittee by Riley himself. The investigation which provided the basis 
for Riley's hearings was conducted by the FBI under the provisions 
of an Executive order. 

The transcripts furnished the committee by Riley reflected that the 
major charges against him in 1948 were that : 

(1) A reiiableand confidential informant for the FBI reported that 
in 1941. 1942, and 1943, while in Spokane, Wash., Riley was a member 
of the Communist Partj' ; 

(2) Confidential informants also reported that Riley had attended 
numerous Communist Party meetings while in Spokane ; 

(3) Also, while in Spokane, he was an officer in a Communist Party 
group ; 

(4) In 1943, when Riley moved to Washington, D. C, a Commu- 
nist Party transfer card was made out in his name, transferring him 
from a Communist Party group in Spokane, Wash., to one in Rock- 
ville, Md. A photostatic copy of this transfer card was obtained and 
made a part of Riley's record. 

In this and other loyalty board hearings, which were held in 1948, 
1951, 1953, and 1954, Riley denied all these allegations, although he 
admitted that he was a member of a "study group" while in Spokane. 
Likewise, at all the hearings, he was cleared and retained in the employ 
of the Federal Government. 

The commitee became interested in the Riley case in December 1953. 
On January 27, 1954, Riley's employment with the Federal Govern- 
ment was terminated, effective February 1. 1954. On March 15, 1954, 
Riley appeared before the committee in Chicago, 111., at which time 
he again denied Communist Party membership and the other allega- 
tions. The committee was able to obtain another witness for 
the Chicago hearing who admitted having been a member of the Com- 
munist Party in Spokane and having also been in the same Commu- 
nist Party group with Riley. The fact that Riley was an active 
member of the Communist Party in Spokane was later substantiated 
b}' the testimony of Barbara Hartle, a long-time Communist Party 
functionary in the Xorthwest area. Mrs. Hartle appeared before the 
committee in June 1954 in Seattle and furnished information regard- 
ing Riley, plus invaluable information concerning Communist Party 
activities in general in the Xorthwest area. 

The following witnesses added to the knowledge of Communist 
activities in the Chicago area by their testimony : 

Date of appearance 

Birnie, Mrs. Helen Wood Mar. IG, 1954. 

Collen, Sheklon O Do. 

Hauson, Mrs. Lois Janet Mar. 15, 1954. 

Rumsey, Walter W Mar. 16, 1954. 

Dattox, Ohio, Area 

Continuing the committee's investigation of Communist infiltration 
in basic industries throughout the United States, hearings were held 
in Dayton, Ohio, September 13, 14, and 15 of this year. The com- 
mittee was fortunate in having the testimony of one Arthur Paul 


Strimk, who had for more than 7 years served as financial secretary 
for the Dayton Communist Party while acting as an undercover agent 
for the Federal Burean of Investigation. Mr. Strunk was not only 
able to give the committee a complete picture of the activities of the 
Communist Party in the Dayton area since 1945, but was also able to 
document and completely expose the part played by the Communist 
Party in the Univis Lens strike in 1948. 

Mr. Strunk testified as follows concerning the control exercised 
by the Communist Party in connection with this strike : 

Mr. Strunk. As far as I recall, the Fuivis Lens strike started the beginning of 
May. In the middle of June, the L'E International sent several fellows into 
Dayton to help in the strategy of this strike. 

Mr. Tavenner. Excuse me. Who sent them in? 

Mr. Strunk. The international. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Strunk. Should I mention the members which were present and v.'orked 
during the Univis Lens strike? 

Mr. Tavenner. Just describe the whole thing in any way that it occurs to you. 

Mr. Strunk. Active during the Univis Lens strike was Kirkendall, Gartield, 
Hirschberg, Payne, Mitchell, Pearl Hupraan, Melvin Hupmau, Bebe Ober, 
Lohman, Louis Kaplan, Lem Markland, Andy Caulder, secretary, 768; Julie 
Jacobs, Irene Jacobs, Paul Dunnian, Joe Brandt, INIartin Chancey, Robert Harri- 
son, Richard Kent. These people were all on my list, Communist Party member- 
ship list, for the purpose of collectiuj; dues from them. 

Mr. Tavenner. I see. The people whose names you have given now are those 
that members of the committee requested that you prepare? 

Mr. Strunk. Those people were all very active during the Univis Lens strike. 
During the strike the Communist Party in Cleveland, Ohio, sent in Joe Brandt and 
Martin Chancey. Once or twice a week they contacted me 

Mr. Tavenner. Who contacted you once or twice a week? 
• Mr. Strunk. Those two men sent in from the Communist State office in 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Stkunk. Which were Joe Brandt and Martin Chancey. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mr. Strunk. Joe Brandt was the labor relations secretary for the Communist 
Party for the State of Ohio. Once or twice a week, either Joe Brandt or Martin 
Chancey came in. I was a trusted person, contacted me, and I had to pull strings 
and get contact with other union officials like Garfield and Hirschberg. The 
same met secretly in my home, or in cars, and discussed strategy of the Univis 

Lens strike. . , „• i. 

Mr. Tavenner. In other words, the two individuals you mentioned, Hirsch- 
berg and Hashmall, were serving 

Mr. Strunk. Martin Chancey. 

Mr. Tavenner. Who were the two people working on th's staff, strategy staff, 
who were being contacted by Brandt and Martin Chancey? 

Mr. Strunk. Arthur Garfield and Hirschberg. 

Mr. Taven.ner. In other words, those 

Mr. Strunk. And Louis Kaplan. 

Mr. Tavenner. They were receiving their directions from Communist Party 
headquarters in Cleveland. Is that what you mean to say? 

Mr. Stkunk. Right, direct. Another person that had a lot of influence, Lou 
Secundy, who was the full paid organizer for the Dayton Communist Party, for 
the Dayton section. He was sitting in a lot of times in meetings when Joe Brandt 
or Martin Chancey contacted Garfield and Hirschberg. 

]\Ir. Tavenner. You say when Martin Chancey and Joe Brandt wanted to get in 
touch with Garfield and Hirschberg . 

Mr. Strunk. He called on me to make arrangements for the meeting, that is 


Mr. Tavenner. How often do you think that occurred? 

Mr. Strunk. At least once a week, sometimes twice a week, during the strike 
when the international sent the staff in, after June 15, 1948. 

Mr. Tavenner. On up until the 1st of August? 

Mr. Strunk. The end of the strike. 


Mr. Tavenneh. The end of the strike? 

Mr. Stijunk. Correct. 

Mr. Tavexner. And some of of those secret meetings were held in your home? 

Mr. Strunk. That is right. 

In connection with the role of the Communist Party in the Univis 
Lens strike, your committee was again fortunate in having the testi- 
mony of oneLeothar "Wornstaft", one of the few non-Communist mem- 
bers of the strike strategy of the UE during this strike. Mr. Worn- 
staff testified concerning the strike as follows : 

Mr. WoKXSTAFF. Well, I do know that we used to hold these strategy meetings 
in the evenings. Sometimes we would get out of these meetings as late as mid- 
night or 1 o'clock in the morning, at which time I would take Mr. Kaplan home. 
He tlien lived out on Fairview Avenue. I would pick him up at 5 o'clock in the 
morning to go to the picket line. He would tell me on the way to the picket line 
that all of the strategy that was planned last evening is called off. So I would 
question him about who called off the particular strategy that we had set up the 
night hefore. He said. "Well, we had a meeting at so-and-so time this morning." 
I asked him where. He said at somebody's restaurant or some other place about 
the city. I asked him who was there in attendance, and he was always very 
evasive about his answers. I could never pin him down as to who was changing 
the strategy that had been set down the night before. 

Mr. SciiEREK. That strategy was changed from the time they left you off at 
your home around midnight 

Mr. WoKXSTAFF. I left him off around midnight until 1 o'clock and the strategy 
was changed from that time until 5 o'clock in the morning, at which time we 
went to the picket line. 

Mr. Walter. There was actually a change in the strategy? 

IMr. WoRXSTAFF. Yes ; very much so. 

Mr. ScHERER. How often did that happen? 

IVIr. WoRNsTAFF. That happened on 3 or 4 different occasions. 

Mr. Clardy. Did he then outline to you what the new strategy was to be? 

Mr. WoKNSTAFF. No ; he didn't. 

Mr. Clardy. Merely junked what you had agreed on the night before? 

Mr. WoRNSTAFF. That is correct. 

During hearings of your committee held in Seattle, "Wash., an 
affirmative vote w-as taken concerning the subpenaing of former Con- 
gressman Hugh DeLacy at the earliest practicable time. Mr. DeLacy 
was identifiecl by Mrs. Barbara Hartle during the Seattle hearings. 
The investigation in the Ohio area developed the fact that Mr. DeLacy 
was than a resident of Cleveland, Ohio, and had for several years 
served as president of the Progressive Party for that State. Mr. 
DeLacy relied upon the fifth amendment when questioned by the com- 
mittee concerning his present or past affiliation with the Communist 

A sample of his answers is quoted for your information : 

Mr. DeLacy. Then, Mr. Chairman, under the existing laws which Congress 
has passed and the President signed, and which make the position of this party 
to which she belonged quite dubious, and under the first amendment to the Con- 
stitution, which gives us all the right to free speech, to freedom of assembly 
peaceably, to petition for address of grievances, and under the fifth amendment, 
which gives us the right to not to testify against ourselves, nor to be deprived 
of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, I must respectfully decline 
to answer the question. 

]Mr. ScHERER. You have, I suppose, properly invoked the fifth amendment, but 
not the first amendment. Will you proceed to the next question? 

Mr. Walter. Just at this point it might be interesting for me to call your atten- 
tion to the fifth amendment. This is a pamphlet issued by the UE, Radio and 
Machine Workers of America, UE, 11 East 51st Street. Here is the way they 
quote the fifth amendment : 

''Nor shall be compelled iu any criminal case to be a witness against him- 


and so on. You will note here that this prohilntion against compulsion is in a 
criminal case. This not only is not a criminal case, but it is not a criminal 
case at all. Certainly admitting knowing this woman could in no wise involve 
you in a criminal case, even under the new laws which I assisted as a member 
of the Judicial Committee in drafting, it certainly seems to me. Dr. DeLacy, 
that your objection as far as the fifth amendment is concerned is not well taken. 
Of course, it is up to you. 

Mr. DeLacy. I think, Mr. Chairman, in view of what I have stated, I should 
persist in my position. 

Mr. Walter. You feel that to answer this question as to whether or not you 
know this Barbara Haitle would subject you to prosecution in a criminal case? 

Mr. DeLacy. I appreciate your kind intent, Mr. V.'alter. As to why I might 
invoke tlie privilege 

Mr. Walter. That is, of course, up to yuu. That is your business. 

The committee has become increasingly aware of the ability of for- 
mer members of the Communist Party to transfer their domicile more 
or less at will in an attempt to escape investigation and/or directly 
testifying before the committee. 

Such is the case of one Lillian Brill Clott, an employee of the Hun- 
garian People's Eepublic while in Washington, D. C., who was able to 
obtain employment in Columbus, Ohio, with a public relations firm, 
after being identified as a former member of the Communist Party by 
Mary Stalcup Markward. Her refusal to answer any and all ques- 
tions relating to present or past membership in the Communist Party 
identified her Avith the several hundred others who have appeared be- 
fore the committee in the past year and answered similarly : 

Mrs. Clott. I continued to work on .a part-time basis in the office of the In- 
ternational Union, Mine, Mill and Sicelter Workers of America. I ceased there, 
to my best recollection, in the early spring. I think it was IMarch. Then in 
April and May, for about 2 months, I v,-orked for the Progressive Party of the 
District of Columbia as an oflice worker. Then I left that and around the end 
of June I went to work for the Hungarian Legation. 

Mr. Tavenner. Hungarian Legation? 

Mrs. Clott. I remained at the Hungarian Legation through 1949 until around 
the end of August, I think it was about the 31st of August. Then in September, 
I went to work for the, on a part-time basis, for the Washington Cooperative 
Book Shop. 

Mr. ScHERER. What bookshop is that? 

Mrs. Clott. The Washington Coopersitive Book Shop. 

Mr. Tavenner. What was the nature of your work there? 

Mrs. Clott. Well, there I sold books, typed any letters that were necessary to 
be typewritten. 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you have anything to do with the maintenance of the record 
of membership of that organization? 

Mrs. ('lott. X(i ; I didn't have anytliing to do with that. 

Sir. Tavenner. In what year was that? 

Mrs. Clott. That I went to work for them? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. 

Mrs. Clott. I just stated it was, I think, around September of 1949. That 
was my best recollection. 

Mr. Tavenner. You were aware at that time that it had been cited by the 
Attoi'uey General as a Communist-front organization ; were you not? 

Mrs. ('LOTT. Yes : I was aware of it. 

Mr. Tavenner. That made no difference to you? 

Mrs. Clott. I never did accept the right of the Attorney General to tell people 
what organizations they can or cannot belong to, and I still don't. 

j\Ir. Tavenner. Did you also belong to the Communist Party in Washington at 
that time? 

Mrs. Clott. I decline to answer that question on the grounds of the first 
amendment and the fifth amendment privilege. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member of the Communist Party at the time you 
were working in various capacities in Chicago — let's confine it to district 7 of 
the UE. 


Mrs. Clott. I decliue to answer that question on the first and fifth amendment 

Mr. Tavenner. While in "Washington, did you become acquainted with Mary 
Stalcup Markward? 

Mrs. Clott. It has been well known in the papers that Mrs. Markward, accord- 
ing to what I read, is a professional paid informer and under the circumstances 
I must invoke the first amendment and the fifth amendment. 

i\!r. Tavenner. By refusing to answer whether you were acquainted with her 
or not? 

Mrs. Clott. By refusing to answer that question. 

Mr. ScHERER. IMarkward, for the record, was an undercover agent for the FBI 
for a number of years in the District of Columbia. 

Mrs. Clott. I think it could be noted for the record, too, from what I read in 
the papers that Mrs. Markward- 

Mr. SciiERER. If the witness please • 

IMrs. Clott. Lied. 

Mr. ScHERER. There is no question before you. 

Mrs. Clott. She has never bt'en prosecuted for perjury. She said she 

]\!r. ScHERER. Witness, I have instructed you not to answer. 

Mrs. Clott. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. ScHERER. There is no question before you. You refused to answer the 

Mrs. Clott. I merely felt if you inserted some knowledge of her I could also 
insert some knowledge of her. 

]Mr. Clardy. Witness, you heard the chairman's instructions. 

Mrs. Clott. I was merely explaining. I will be quiet. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a member at any time while in Washington of the 
Community Club of the Communist Party? 

Mrs. Clott. I decline to answer that question on the grounds of the first amend- 
ment and the fifth amendment privilege. 

Mr. Taven^ek. According to the testimony of Mrs. Markward, you were 
dropped from the Communist Party rolls at the time that you were an employee 
in the Legation that you spoke of. I believe you said it was the Hungarian Lega- 
tion. Will you tell the committee about that? 

Mrs. Clott. I decline to answer that question on the grounds of the first a-nd 
fifth amendments. 

During your committee's hearings in Dayton, Ohio, several wit- 
nesses connected with various institutions of higher learning in the 
United States were subpenaed. It was regretted that both Mr. Lee 
Lorch of Fisk University, Nashville, Tenn., and Robert M. Metcalf, 
of Antioch College, refused to cooperate with the committee and give 
us the benefit of their knowledge concerning the operations of the 
Communist Party. 

Mr. Lorch testified that he was a member of the National Advisory 
Committee for Aeronautics in 1946, and that prior to that had been 
employed by tlie same committee at Langley Field, Va. 

Mr, Lorch in later testimony, refused on grounds of the first and 
fifth amendments, excluding the section relating to self-incrimination, 
to answer all questions relating to alleged membership in the Com- 
munist Party during this and subsequent periods, up until his em- 
ployment at Fisk University in 1952. 

]\Ir. iMetcalf readily admitted his participation in a Communist 
group at Antioch College, in the fall of 1945, and the spring of the 
following year. Plowever, he refused to give your committee the 
identity of any of the individuals vvith wdiom he met during these 

At the closing of all hearings of your committee, the chairman of 
the committee or subcommittee makes available an opportunity for 
any person named during the committee hearings to deny or explain 
any of the testimony taken during that or previous hearings. Such 


an invitation was extended by Congressman Scherer at the close of 
the Dayton hearings. No one came forward and tlie hearings were 
officially concluded. 

However, immediately following the conclusion of the hearings, 
one Dwight Williamson, mentioned in previous testimony of Arthur 
Strunk as having been a member of the Communist Party, came for- 
ward to explain his membership. Mr. Scherer reopened the hearing 
and Mr. Williamson testified as follows : 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Williamson, you were identified during the course of the 
testimony here as having been a member of the Communist Party, and we under- 
stood that you desired to appear before the committee and state what the facts 
are relating to your former Communist Party membership. 

Mr. Williamson. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. So I want to give you the opportunity now to either deny, 
confirm it, or make such explanation as might be consistent with the facts. 

Mr. Williamson. That is right. I was in for two periods, the period from 
approximately 19.38 or 1939 until 1942 ; again from 1950, late in the year — 
possibly Thanksgiving time, maybe Christmas time; I know it was late in the 
fall of 1950 — until early spring 195.3. 

Mr. Tavenner. You have been a member then, as late as the spring of 19.53? 

Mr. Williamson. Well, it is a little hard to explain how I left. It was a 
gradual drifting away. The next contact I had, I know it was in the spring 
of 1953, the next contact I had I was told that I had owed 10 months' dues $10 
apiece, which would be $100 plus $50 for a fund which would make it $150. 

Mr. Tavenner. I am sorry. Will you speak up a little louder? I didn't hear 

Mr. Williamson. I say, the reason I know that it was in the spring of 1953, 
is because in February 1954, I was notified I was in arrears 10 months' dues, 
which would amount to $100 and at $10 a month. 

Mr. Tavenner. Well, if you were a member as late as the spring of 1953, the 
Communist Party would have been divided at that time for security reasons into 
small groups. Isn't that true? 

Mr. Williamson. That is correct. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you a memlter of a small group of 3 or 4 members? 

Mr. Williamson. Yes ; two small groups at various times. 

Mr. Tavenner. You have belonged to two small groups? 

Mr. Williamson. That is right. 

Mr. Tavenner. Tell the committee,, how the whole plan of operating 
the Communist Party was during that period, as late as 1953. 

Mr. Williamson. I don't quite understand what you mean. 

Mr. Tavenner. I mean, tell us how the party was divided into these small 
groups, and how they met, and how Communist Party information was imparted 
to its members, and any other information that you can give us about it. 

Mr. Williamson. Well, these groups were Frigidaire groups, and they were 
varied as to membership. Those from one group seemed at one time to be in 
one group, and one time to be in another group. Meetings were sometimes held 
in my house, Strunk's house, and two times, I think, at my house. In good 
weather they were out in the open, public parks. 

Mr. Tavenner. But those meetings were very secret? 

Mr. Williamson. Oh, yes ; nobody but the membership of the party was 
allowed to attend that meeting. 

Mr. Tavenner. Who were the members of your small group? 

Mr. Williamson. Well, on one group there was Lance, I don't know his first 
name. He is since dead ; Harry McGill, myself. 

Mr. Tavenner. I didn't get that name. 

Mr. Williamson. Harry McGill and myself. And the other group at a later 
date, there was Roger Dunham, Red Hupman, myself, and in both of these 
groups the organizer, Lou somebody or other, took charge of both of them. 

Mr. Tavenner. I didn't understand the name of the organizer. 

Mr. Williamson. All I can tell you is Lou. I couldn't — I don't actually know 
his last name. I never seen it and never heard it. It is Lou, that is all I know. 

I\Ir. Tavenner. What was the name of the Hupman who was a member of 
your group? 

Mr. Williamson. Melvin. 


]Mr. Tavennkr. Is he the same person who was indicted and tried recently 
for viohition of the Taft-Hartley Act? 

llr. Williamson. That is right, but I have no knowledge he violated the Taft- 
H;utley Act. 

Mr. Tavexner. You stated that in 1954 you received a notice that you were in 
an ears in your dues. 

Mr. Williamson. That Is right. 

Jlr. Tavlnner. In your dues to the amount of about $10? 

Mr. Williamson. Ko, about $100. 

Mr. Tavenner. One hundred dollars. Over a period of 10 months, I think you 
sa ;d ? 

Mr. WiLiiAMsoN. That is right. 

;\Ir. Tavennek. Well, what war; the amount of dues that you were required 
to pay? 

^Ir. WiLLL\MsoN. The last time I paid dues, it was $2 per month. At the time 
I was told I was in arrears, they were going to reregister me, I owed them .$100 
for 10 months" dues, $10 per month. 

Mr. Tavenner. V\'ell, do you know for what purpose that money was being 
raised or used? 

Jlr. Williamson. That amount, no. 

Mr. Tavenner. Were you requested to make contributions for any special proj- 
ects or purposes of the Communist Party? 

Mr. Williamson. Yes. They were for funds, and seme type of a fund that is 
statewide. I don't know the name of it. I know tlie mon- . was, a certain amount 
stayed in the city of Dayton, a certain amount was sent to the State. 

Mr. Tavenner. I '■ni interested in the fact that you were a member and then 
dropped out and still went back again into the Communist Party. What was 
the explanation for that? 

Mr. Williamson. I dropped out in 1942 for ideological reasons, and in 1950, 

Mr. ScHEKER. Will you raise your voice a little bit? 

Mr. Williamson. Certainly. Frigidaire became involved in an inner union 
strife. Since I had been a member of the UE in 1942, my sympathy was in that 
direction. I supported the UE in the inner-plant strife, inner-union strife. At 
the close of the struggle, the cleavage in tiie plant was so great that there was 
hardly anybody left for me to talk to, a':d I was as.sociated very closely with 
the UE division in the Frigidaire plant. Gradually I drew closer and closer and 
was invited back in, and reentered the party, and as I stated, in the fall or 
winter, I know it was around Thanksgivingtime 19r)0. I think that is the 
year the strike was in the spring, and that was the next winter. 

Mr. Tavenner. Why was it you dr.^pped out in 1953? 

Mr. Williamson. Just general lack of interest. That is, for a while I was 
quite active. I attended meetings maybe twice a week. Then I drifted further 
away, once a month, or whenever they could get in touch with me. 

Mr. Tavenner. Is there anything else you would like to say to the '"ommittee 
regarding your membership in the Communist Party, former membership in the 
Communist Party? 

Mr. Williamson. In what line? 

Mr. Tavenner. Any line. I mean, you have asked to appear here voluntarily 
because your name was mentioned here adversely, and I just want to make cei"- 
taiu that you have told the committee all you have in mind. 

Mr. Williamson. No, that is all I have to state. So far as I am concerned, 
there was no subversion on my part or the part of anyone that I was in connec- 
tion with. Everyone so far as I know were loyal American citizens. There were 
no statements ever made by anyone derogatory to the United States of America. 
We were never asked to spy upon anybody, any group that I was in, or any 
time, we were never asked or expected to furnish information. Most of the 
time was spent in study. I will say 50 percent, 70 percent of most meetings were 
study. The rest news collection and literature. 

The following witnesses jrave testimony regarding Communist ac- 
tivities in the Dayton, Ohio, area : 

Miniard, Marvin M Sept. 14, 1954. 

Ober, John Sept. 15, 1954, 

Ober, Bebe Sept. 15, 1954. 

Strunk, Arthur Paul Sept. 13, 1954. 

Williamson, Dwight Sept. 15, 1954. 


District or Columbia 

On July 14 and 15, 1954, the committee held additional hearings 
dealing with Communist Party activities in Washington, D. C. These 
hearings represented the committee's continued investigation of this 
sulbject following the valuable testimony of Mrs. Mary Stalcup Mark- 
ward given to the committee in 1951 wherein she exposed the inner 
workings of the Communist Partv in the District of Columbia from 
1943 to 1949. 

The committee called 11 witnesses from the District of Columbia 
area in the sincere belief that they possessed knowledge of current 
or recent Communist Party activities in the District of Columbia. 
Each of these individuals had been identified in sworn testimony 
before the committee as having been an active member of the Com- 
munist Party in the District of Columbia. These individuals were 
subpenaed and asked to assist the committee in its investigation of 
Communist Party activities in the District of Columbia. At the time 
of their examination on this subject, each relied upon the fifth amend- 
ment when asked to give information pertaining to their Communist 
Party activities in the District of Columbia or any knowledge they 
possessed regarding communism in the United States. 

Mary Stalcup Markward was the only cooperative witness in this 
area. She testified in executive session on June 11, 1951. This testi- 
mony was released on July 7, 1951, but not printed until June 23, 1954. 


The House Committee on Un-American Activities held hearings in 
Miami, Fla., on November 29 and 30, and December 1, 1954, with a 
view to ascertaining the scope and success of subversive infiltration in 
Miami, the State of Florida, and the great southeastern section of the 
United States. 

The committee received valuable testimony from Edwin E. Waller, 
Ralph V. Long, Raul Vidal, Jose D. Tomargo, Jr., Louis J. Popps, 
Hilda Shlafrock, and James Nimmo, all of whom testified about Com- 
munist activities and infiltration not only in Miami but throughout 
the southeastern section of this country. 

Seven other individuals, identified as having been members of the 
Communist Party, appeared before the committee and refused to af- 
firm or deny their Communist Party membership. One person denied 
Communist Party membership. 


The committee's hearings in Michigan during 1954 were held in 
Detroit, Lansing, and Flint; 12 of the subpenaed witnesses not heard 
during May were called to give testimony in Washington, D. C, in 
November. In addition to this, the committee, during the past year, 
heard testimony from Merton Sumner, who was a member of the 
Communist Party during his period of residence in Grand Rapids, 
Mich., and from JFrancis X. Crowley, who was a member of the Com- 
munist Party while a student at the University of Michigan at Ann 

These hearings could be properly considered as a continuation of 
the hearings which the Committee on Un-American Activities held in 
Detroit, Mich., in 1952. As a matter of fact, in 1952 the committee 


reported that during its investigation the identity of over 600 individ- 
uals as Communist Party members was obtained. 

The 1954 hearings were set up by the committee in order to demon- 
strate to the people of Michigan the fields of concentration of the Com- 
munist Party in the jNIichigan area, and the identity of those individ- 
uals responsible for its success. The concentration of the Communist 
Party as outlined b}^ this report is not the figment of a dream by the 
connnittee but comes directly from the Communist Party itself. This 
concentration is set forth in a directive to all Communist groups, sec- 
tions, commissions, and departments, which the committee obtained 
during its investigation. This directive, while intending to advertise 
the Communist Party as an organization interested in furthering the 
trade-union movement, falsifies its own advertisement by placing all 
emphasis on the need to repeal all laws used against the Communist 
Party and its members, including the Smith Act, the non-Communist 
affidavit section of the Taft-Hartley law and the Walter-McCarran 
Immigration Act. Of secondaiy importance in the directive, but 
equally stressed, is what the Communists refer to as "the People's 
Peace" program. This program is set forth as a campaign against 
KATO, friendship with the Soviet Union, and the opening of trade 
channels with the "People's Democracies," China, and the Soviet 

The Communist Party, in its directive, sets forth that the accom- 
plishment of its program can be achieved only through a successful 
concentration in the auto industry. It reminds Communist Party 
members that concentration in the auto industry is not the function 
only of those Communist employees within the industry but, rather, 
that it is the responsibility of all Communists. 

In 1952, the connnittee saw signs and had partial evidence of the 
Communist Party moving its members from white-collar and profes- 
sional positions into the auto industry from other geographical loca- 
tions in the United States. The directive of the Communist Party on 
concentration in the auto industry gives a clue as to why, and this is 
the reason the committee devoted a portion of its investigation and 
hearings to the city of Flint. In the directive, the Communist Party 
called for a drastic improvement in the work among General Motors 
workers. The directive states : 

" * * Flint is the key to moving the GM division of the UAW, the division 
which Rputher heads and therefore the liey to striliing a powerful blow against 
sofial democracy. Whatever develops in Flint has great influence on the entire 

* * * Where party work was on a relatively higher level as in Ford, the anti- 
Reuther strength was greatest. In G^I, our main national concentration sector, 
the progressives were weakest of all. * * * It's therefore clear that we need a 
drastic improvement in our work in auto, in the first place in our work in Gil, 
without in any way curtailing our work in Ford which remains our main con- 
centration point in ^Michigan's Wayne County. 

To strengthen itself within General Motors, the Communist Party 
in 1919 issued instructions to its members to drop employment in non- 
basic industries, if they were presently emploj'ed, and urged the Com- 
munist members in colleges to seek basic-industry employment, even 
though their educational training qualified them for a higher type of 

During the Flint hearings, members of the Communist Party, some 
with college degrees, were found employed on General Motors assem- 


bly lines. Not only were they employed, but the committee found 
that many of the Communists subpenaed before it went so far as to 
cover up their college education or degrees and resorted to the manu- 
facturing of previous employment. 

One witness, Marvin M. Engel, on his application for employment 
with the Chevrolet Motor Division of General Motors, claimed no 
college education when, as a matter of fact, he had received a social- 
science degree from the City College of New York. As previous 
employment, he listed the Universal Fence Co. of Detroit as being his 
employer for some 30 months. Sidney Linn, signing as an officer of 
the Universal Fence Co., confirmed Engel's 30-month employment 
with his concern. Yet, the truth of the matter was that Engel had 
never been employed by the Universal Fence Co., according to his 
own sworn testimony before the committee. Whether there is a 
bearing, the committee has no proof, but sworn testimony before the 
committee identified both Engel and Linn as members of the Com- 
munist Party in INIichigan. 

Other illustrations similar to that of Engel were reproduced 
throughout the jMichigan hearings. The committee is of the opinion 
that these young Communists were directed into Michigan for the 
purpose of fulfilling the Communist dream, namely the need for "a 
drastic improvement in our [Communist Party] work in auto." 

Communist Party colonizers, similar to the 25 exposed in Flint and 
other Michigan hearings, were the main target of the committee's 1954 
investigation. Lack of adequate investigative personnel made it 
impossible to expose fully the infiltration in ]\[ichigan. Left in a 
pending stage were partial identities of some 75 other members of 
the Communist Party sent into the Michigan area for the purpose of 
building up the Communist Party's concentration within the auto 
industry. The committee regrets that it was unable to complete its 
investigation in this field, but, at the same time, it feels that, if indus- 
try and labor would concern themselves more with the infiltration into 
their midst of i^otential Communist saboteurs, they could be removed 
from the auto industry without need of congressional investigation. 

The Communist Party directive, in outlining the role to be played 
by the entire membership of the Communist Party in its concentration 
in auto, set forth the need to organize for peace (Soviet-proposed), 
for activities in political subdivisions surrounding Detroit, and for 
propagandizing among auto workers' wives and children with instru- 
ments such as the INIichigan Worker and other Communist publi- 

The bulk of the witnesses heard in Detroit, Mich., and later in 
Washington, D. C, were called to ascertain and expose the activities of 
the Conununist Party in these broad fields. Joseph Chrin, who was 
shown by sworn testimony to have been a member of the Communist 
Party, was the leader of the Down River Citizens Committee. The 
Down River Citizens Committee operated in the communities heavily 
populated hj Ford workers. It advertised as a political organization 
interested in the betterment of the Down River community. In fact 
and in practice, as set forth by sworn testimony, the Down River 
Citizens Committee was solely a vehicle of the Communist Party. Its 
program, while supporting many worthy issues and candidates for 
public office, was nevertheless geared to fulfill the objectives of the 
Communist Party. Harold Robertson, who was identified as a meiri-i 


ber of the Communist Party living in Inkster, Midi., was found to 
have been a candidate for political oflice in his community and also a 
political appointee to the school board. 

Durino- the committee's investigation, it uncovered members of the 
Communist Party holding infiuential positions in the school systems 
of Detroit and other communities. IMost of the teachers subpenaed 
before the committee refused to answer questions with respect to their 
membership in the Communist Party, on the ground that to do so 
would tend to incriminate them. Most of the teachers called have 
been suspended or permanently removed from their positions. The 
Committee on Un-American Activities approves of this action because 
the committee has found that the delivery of a student into the tute- 
lage of a member of the Communist Party has been responsible for the 
destruction of thousands of American homes. It is horrible enough 
to lose 13 Americans to Red China as a result of a war, especially when 
the war was not of America's choosing. It is far more horrible to 
lose one American to the Communist conspiracy through a teacher 
in a free educational institution of America. 

As a result of the hearings held in Michigan in 1952 and again in 
1954, the Committee on Un-American Activities calls upon the Amer- 
ican labor movement, in addition to its ever increased vigilance 
toward communism, to amend its constitutions where necessary in. 
order to deny membership to a member of the Communist Party or 
any other group which dedicates itself to the destruction of America's 
waV of life. It is certainly not within the best interests of the security 
of the United States, nor of the interest of the unions, to permit a 
member of the Communist Party or any other totalitarian party to 
work 8 hours a day in an American industry with the protection 
of a union contract and, at the same time, supply him with a captive 
audience of thousands through which he can preach his program 
of destruction. It is said that the worker is far too smart to be 
suckered into accepting the Communist harangue. It is admitted that 
the American worker, through education on the evils of communism 
and other totalitarianisms by both his union and his employer, has 
more knowledge on the subject today than at any time during his 
life. Xevertheless, the Communist Party is receiving new recruits 
daily from the ranks of labor, admittedly not so many as in the past. 
It is difficult to believe, however, that tliis recruitment would be as 
great if Communist Party organizers and advocates were removed 
from the captive audience which union and industry place around them 
in the shop. 

The testimony of the following witnesses added much to the infor- 
mation of the committee regarding the scope of Communist activities 
in the State of ]SIichigan : 

Baldwin, Berenieee ^^iiy "J". 1054. 

Churchill, Beatrice May 12, 19.")4. 

Dalv, Francis Martin, Jr Apr. 30, 19.14. 

Donnelly, Herbert H May 14, 1954. 

Johnson, William H. (Bill) May 4, 19.j4. 

Klein, Lawrence R Apr. 30, 1954. 

Mikkelsen, Harold M May 4, 19.-)4. 

Santwire, Milton .Toseph Apr. 2S, 1954. 

Schemanske, Stephen J Apr. 29, 1954. 

Stepanchenko, Frank Apr. 29, 19.-)4. 

Witness X— Apr. 30, 1954. 


Pacific Northwest Area 


In June 1954 the House Committee on Un-American activities for 
the first time held hearings in the Pacific Northwest area of the 
United States. That these hearings were met with the approval of 
the people living in that important area is stressed in the fact that the 
committee received telegrams from virtually every non-Communist 
labor organization in the Seattle area supporting and encouraging the 
committee's functions. 

The committee was fortunate in receiving testimony from a witness 
whose knowledge of Communist Party activities was current almost 
to the date of the hearings. The committee received lengthy testi- 
mony from INIrs. Barbara Hartle, who had been a member and official 
of the Communist Party in the Pacific Northwest area_ from 1933 
mitil early 1951 and gained a position of such importance in the Com- 
munist Party that the Government of the United States arrested her on 
September 17, 1952, on the charge that she had violated the provisions 
of the Smith Act. Mrs. Hartle was later convicted in Federal court 
and was under sentence at the time she was subpenaed to testify before 
this committee. Mrs. Hartle explained that while there had been oc- 
casions of disillusionment in the past she had really recognized thetrue 
purposes of the Communist Party and its lack of interest in the indi- 
vidual members during the course of the Smith Act trial. IMrs. 
Hartle stated that she had recognized that the Communist Party 
efforts to insure that she would maintain a party position in her 
defense was in reality makino- her a token of sacrifice to the party. _ 

One of the most important'items in the voluminous and informative 
testimony of Mrs. Hartle was the manner in which she had first be- 
come associated with the Communist Party. She stated that she had 
first joined the Friends of the Soviet Union and that through the 
knowledge of Communist Party affairs and literature available 
through this Communist front she had eventually become amenable 
to actual membership in the Communist Party. This testimony typi- 
fies what the committee has found in so many other instances— an 
individual bein^ led into actual Connnunist Party membership 
throuah association in Communist-front organizations. 

The committee is indeed indebted to this woman who although she 
had spent nearly 20 years as a part of the Communist conspiracy rec- 
ognized the dangers of the conspiracy and furnished her Government, 
both this committee and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with the 
wealth of knowledge she had gained concerning communism. 

Pacific Northwest Area 

(Portland, Oreg.) 

The House Committee on Un-American Activities held hearings in 
Portland, Oreg., June 18 and 19, 1954. The hearings and investigation 
centered largely around communistic infiltration of education, profes- 
sional groups, and labor. The committee received valuable testi- 
mony from Homer LeBoy Owen, Barbara Hartle, and Robert Wishart 
Canon, all of whom testified about Communist activities and infiltra- 
tion not only in Portland, Oreg., but throughout the Northwest and 


other parts of the United States. Some 14 other individuals identified 
as having been members of the Connnunist Party appeared before the 
committee and refused to affirm or deny their Communist Party mem- 
bership. Several refused to answer questions pertaining to their past 
education, employment, residences, and military service. Thereafter, 
on July 23, 1954, after unanimous vote by the committee itself, the 
House of Representatives, by vote of 376 to 0, cited Thomas G. Moore, 
John Eodgers MacKenzie, Donald M. Wollam, and Herbert Simpson 
for contempt of Congress. 

Pertinent parts of the testimony of Homer Owen were of consider- 
able interest to the committee, particularly those comments regard- 
ing his reasons for joining the Connnunist Party, his Communist 
activity paralleling his Progressive Party activity, and his decisions 
to break with the Communist Party. Mr. Owen testified that he was 
23 years old when he joined the Communist Party in Portland, Oreg. ; 
he stated he joined the party because — 

I presume that I followed the course of many people who have joined, a desire 
to improve the world and to do it quickly. In my case, I became interested 
about doing something al)out racial discrimination. I came from a strict reli- 
gious background and I grew frustrated with the church because I felt they 
were not doing enough about it. I thought that the concept of the brotherhood 
of man demanded that the churches be in the foreground to eliminate dis- 
crimination * * * so in the spring of 1947 I attended a meeting at which I, 
along with others, were urged to join the Communist Party * * * on the grounds 
that it was the most elTective organization to work toward these principles that 
we felt to be important * * * even thou'-h at that time I knew nothing al)Out 
the Communist Party, I read none of its literature, I v>as urged to join because, 
as I said, it could implement the progressive program most effectively and I 
could learn later. * * * i must have been considerably naive. 

Mr. Owen stated that during the Communist Partv meetings which 
he attended, they discussed Communist theory, the works of Marx, 
Engels, Lenin, Stalin; also planned activity for particular campus 
activity in relation to work in the Young Progressives on the campus. 
He stated — 

* * * when the Wallace campaign was announced that was a primary interest 
of the Communist Party as well as other progressive groups and energies were 
devoted in distributing literature, organizing campus sentiment for his candidacy. 

He further stated: 

Before leaving the campus in 1948, I believe it was in December of 1947, I 
became chairman of Students for Wallace, and as I recall our principal effort 
was a petition urging Wallace to run. This was prior to his announc- 
ing his candidacy. Since I shortly thereafter became office manager for Pro- 
gressive Citizens of America, and then subsequently for the Progressive Party 
of America, little became of the Students for Wallace in this part of the country. 

Mr. Owen testified that he subsequently became both a Democratic 
and Progressive Party nominee for the State legislature. He was 
asked how he became a nominee and who decided that he should run 
for the legislature, to which he answered : 

It was decided in a meeting of the legislative commission of the Communist 
Party of Oregon. At that time, at that meeting it was decided that a slate of 
Roosevelt Democrats should run and also that I should be on that ticket. * * * 
They decided on the fact that there should be a slate running in the Democratic 
and Progressive— this was particularly in the Democratic primaries in its original 
conception, and then, of course, later the same candidates were supported and 
nominated by the Progressive Party. 


It is interesting to note the reasons given by Mr. Owen for his leav- 
ing the Communist Party, which are quoted as follows : 

The reasons, firstly, I would say are the reverse of the reasons I joined. I 
became more and more convinced that the Communist Party was not effectively 
working for the ideals and the principles which led me to join. In fact, to the 
contrary, I felt the party, the Communist Party, to be destructive in that in 
every activity the emphasis was always on putting the party forward, how many 
were recruited, not what was accomplished and no emphasis on what was 

Secondly, I also became more and more dissatisfied with the way the party 
operated. * * * j began also to become more critical myself of the other poli- 
cies. Also there was just the desire to lead a normal life. I became completely 
weary of the endless activity, ringing doorbells * * * and also of the isolation, 
the growing isolation that membership in the Communist I'arty meant. 

In answer to the question as to whether the Communist Party took 
up quite a bit of his life, Mr. Owen stated : 

It seems at times practically all of it. The meetings night after night and 
while going to school posed quite a problem and perpetual conflict between 
trying to do a good job at school and doing this work which you felt had to be 
done. * * * This [work] I think helps to delay the process of going out [of 
the party]. You're so busy, you're so active that you don't have time to stop 
and think. What you do read is in justification of your own day-to-day activity 
of political agitation. 

You will recall that Mr. Owen stated that he became a member of the 
Communist Party because he thought that the Communist Party might 
contribute to doing away Avith racial discrimination. He subse- 
quently stated that he found that this was not correct and further said : 

* * * I feel that much more had been accomplished from just the recent 
Supreme Court decisions, the quiet work of people, organizations, without fan- 
fare, without the tremendous publicity which always accompanies a Communist 
Party approach to a problem. These other things contribute much more to the 
elimination of discrimination. 

It is interesting to note how the comments of Eobert Canon regard- 
ing his Communist Party activity parallel those of Mr, Owen, Mr. 
Canon stated regarding Communist Party meetings : 

* * * We were not encouraged to ask questions * * *, and then in the early 
months of the party, we * * * were somewhat isolated. We spent most of our 
time in our club meetings just discussing oui- own interest in our outside organiza- 
tions, and then the party began to ask us to become more party conscious too, as 
the term was, put the face of the party forward, to spend more and more of our 
time in actual party work. 

We were criticized, in 1948 for example, for becoming too enthusiastic about 
Henry WalUice and the Progressive Party. They kept reminding us, "Henry 
Wallace is not a Communist. He is a capitalist. This is a fine organization, the 
Progressive Party, in getting people interested in issues, but for heaven's sake 
don't go overboard for it. The Communist Party is the only one that is 

This discipline — we were introduced more and more to, the party concept of 
what is known as self-criticism where you sit around a circle and tear yourself 
to pieces. 

And the ritualistic nonsense just began to pall on me. They began to be asked 
to address each other as "comrade," and so forth and "tigliten, tighten, tighten 

Mr. Canon further stated : 

Yes, and they began to talk and more and more in terms of FBI, infiltrating 
spies, and so oii, and the wht)le framework actually became rather foolish, as far 
as I was concerned. I knew that we weren't plotting to blow up any bridges or 
anything of the sort, and all of this ritual just seemed a little bit ridiculous. 


And tben, the second thing that began to push me out of the party was the 
realizaion of the extent of the intolerance in the party. One of the primary rea- 
sons that I was interested in the first place was because I had met a group of 
people who I thought were idealistic, were ontlooking, sympathetic, and tolerant 
people, broadminded people, and I came to find out that most Communists, I think, 
are the most intolerant of all people. We began to move in a smaller and smaller 
circle. As you concentrate on party literature, which you are urged to do, and 
began to confine your friendship to those people who are members of the Com- 
munist Party, you become excessively critical of anybody who can't go along with 
you a hundred percent. 

And this was also a" period when we were moving away from the Earl Browder 
idea of the so-called united front, Earl Browder's concept of working in coopera- 
tion with other groups of people. But the party was now moving to the point 
where it said, "No ; we must solidify the party itself." And so there was a social 
and an intellectual isolation which I resented very much, a loss of perspective. 
I don't think that you can belp but lose one's perspective when you live in such an 

The party overworks you terribly. They exploit initial enthusiasms, as in the 
case of Homer Owen. A perfectly fine, idealistic boy who gets interested and they 
load work on him to the point where it would practically break him. Well the 
same thing is true of us. We got to the point where if we stole 1 night, 1 of 7 
for our family, we felt guilty for having let down the great people's movement. 

The whole thing just became irritating. I thought it v/as out of focus, out of 
perspective, intolerant, and so forth. And so we really wanted to pull out in 
1948; however, we were involved in the Progressive Party elections, and the 
Democrat Party elections, and there was no convenient way of extricating our- 
selves overnight. So far as I know, my wife and I were never expelled from the 
party nor did we ever indulge in histrionics in getting up and making a tirade 
against the party or anything of the sort. We more or less drifted away. 

Testimony of the following witnesses developed to a great extent 
the pattern of Communist activities in the Pacific Northwest area of 
the United States : 

Date of appearance 

Backlund, Carl June 19, 1954. 

Blodgett, Charles David Mar. 16, 1954. 

Canon, Robert Wishart June 19, 1954. 

Case, Victor June 19, 1954. 

Cohen, Elizabeth Boggs May 28, 1954, 

Costigan, Howard May 28, 19.54. 

Davis, Ralph George June 19, 1954. 

Dennett, Eugene V June 18, 1954. 

Hartle, Barbara June 14-19, 1954. 

Keller, Abraham Charles June 17, 1954. 

Larsen, Karley A June 19, 1954. 

McClaskey, Eugene Kenneth Oct. .3, 1952, released in 1954. 

Owen, Homer Leroy June 18, 1954. 

Owen, Marjorie Jean (Mrs. Homer L. Portion of executive testimony on June 
Owen) 9, 1954, released. 

Redwell, Rev. Clinton June 16, 1954. 

Sunoo, Harold W June 17, 19.54. 

Wildman, Leonard Basil May 28, 19.54. 

Williams, Foster, Jr June 17, 1954. 

Philadelphia, Pa. 

The House Committee on Un-American Activities commenced hear- 
ings in Philadelphia, Pa., November 16 through November 18, 1953, 
dealing exclusively with individuals who are either currently, or had 
been, engaged as schoolteachers in Philadelphia. 

On February 16 and 17, 1954, a subcommittee of the Committee on 
Un-American Activities resumed hearings in Washington, D. C, 
receiving testimony from an additional group of individuals who are 


or were employed as schoolteachers in the Philadelphia area. As in 
previous cases of witnesses called before the committee, these teachers 
had been identified through investigation as having been members 
of the Communist Party and possibly having continued their member- 
ship until the present time. 

During these hearings, 18 witnesses appeared before the committee. 
The majority denied present Communist Party membership but re- 
fused to answer any questions regarding Communist activities prior 
to their signing a loyalty oath as required by Pennsylvania State law 
in the earl}- months of VJ'rI. Others refused to affirm or deny present 
or past Communist Party membership. The connnittee desires to 
make the observation that the total of 37 teachers from the Philadel- 
phia area who appeared before the committee is a very small fraction 
of the large group of teachers presently employed in Philadelphia, 
Pa., and who are, without any doubt, loj-al American citizens. 

]\Irs. Goldie E. Watson refused to answer many questions, did not 
deny or affirm past Communist Party membership, and frequently 
based her refusal to answer questions on her rights under the first 
amendment to the Constitution. 

Dr. Wilbur Lee Mahaney, Jr., admitted his former Communist 
Party membership and associations but refused to answer further 
questions regarding Conununist Party activity and Connnunist Party 

Thereafter, on ^Nlay 11, 1054, after unanimous vote by the committee 
itself, the House of Pe]iresentatives, by vote of lUG to 0, cited Mrs. 
Goldie E. Watson and Dr. Wilbur Lee Mahaney, Jr., for contempt of 

Dr. Mahanej' voluntarily reappeared before the committee on July 
30, 1054, and testified under oath fully and freely about his former 
Connnunist Party activities and associations. Following Dr. 
ISIahaney's second appearance before the connnittee and in view of 
his willingness to testify, the committee voted that a letter be directed 
to the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia advising 
him that the committee was satisfied that Dr. Mahaney had purged 
the contempt for which he had been previously cited. 


jNIany of the recommendations put forth by the House Committee 
on Un-American Activities for the year 1053 have already been 
enacted into law in one form or another. Among them are legisla- 
tion cracking down on Communist-dominated labor unions, death 
penalty for espionage in }:)eacetime, immunity for witnesses appearing 
before congressional committees, and the adoption of procedures 
withdrawing commissions from persons in the armed services taking 
the fifth amendment when questioned by a duly authorized authority 
concerning membership in the Communist Party. 

In addition. Congress considered the delicate subject of outlawing 
the Communist Party and has enacted a partial outlawing provision 
which is now in efl'ect. 

The following recommendations are submitted based upon investi- 
gations and hearings, in the year 1054. 


The Smith Act, passed by the Conoress in 1940, contains provi- 
sions which prohibit any person from knowii]<2;ly and willfully par- 
ticipating either nidividually or with a group in activities whicli 
have for their purpose the overthrow or destruction of "any govern- 
ment in the United States by force or violence." Since the Subversive 
Activities Control Board, affirmed by the United States Court of Ap- 
peals for the District of Columbia Circuit, has found that the Com- 
munist Party is a subversive organization and the testimony before 
this committee has also definitely established the conspiratorial nature 
of the Communist Party, the committee recommends that the Smith 
Act be amended. This amendment, in the field of the law of evidence, 
shou.ld provide that proof of membership in the Commmiist Party 
shall constitute prima facie evidence of violation of the Smith Act. 

The committee further recommends that legislation be enacted to 
permit as evidence the results of technical surveillance in matters 
affecting the national security; provided that adequate safeguards 
are adopted to protect the civil liberties of all citizens. 

The committee further recommends that legislation be enacted to 
make it a crime for any person or persons unauthorizedly to transport 
in interstate commerce any Government document falling witliin a 
top-secret, secret, or confidential classification. 

The committee further recommends that legislation be enacted for- 
bidding the use of the United States mails under second-class mailing 
privileges to subversive publications emanating either from foreign 
sources or from sources Avithin the borders of the United States. It 
is also reconnneiided that the Internal Security Act of 11)50 be 
amended to permit the citing of said publications as subversive. 

The committee further recommends that the Foreign Agents Reg- 
istration Act of 19.38 be reexamined to determine its effectiveness in 
controlling and exposing subversive activities. 

The committee further recommends that appropriate legislation be 
enacted requiring an affidavit by any person bidding for a Govern- 
ment contract, that he is not now and has not been within the past 
10 years a member of an}- organization advocating the overthrow of 
the Government h} force and violence. 


Individuals Page 

Ackerstein , Lynn 6 

Adams, George Richard Earl 6 

Backlund, Carl 21 

Baldwin, Bereniece 17 

Bayme , Carol 6 

Berman, Mildred 6 

Berman , Philip 6 

Birnie, Helen Wood 6, 7 

Blodgett, Charles David 21 

Brandt, Joe 8 

Canon, Robert Wishart 18, 20, 21 

Case, Victor 21 

Caulder, Andy 8 

Chancey , Martin 8 

Charles, John Patrick 4 

Chrin , Joseph 16 

Churchill , Beatrice 17 

Clott, Lillian Brill 10 

Cohen, Elizabeth Boggs 21 

Collen, Sheldon O 6, 7 

Costigan, Howard 21 

Crowley, Francis X 14 

Daly, Francis Martin, Jr 17 

Davis, Jack 4 

Davis, Ralph George 21 

DeLacy , Hugh 9 

Dennett, Eugene V 21 

Deutch, Bernhard 4 

Dixon, Earl {see Reno, Earl) 5 

Donnelly, Herbert H 17 

Dunham, Roger 12 

Dunkel, John. 6 

Dunraan, Paul 8 

Engel, Marvin M.. 16 

Feinglass, Abe " 

Garfield, Arthur L » 

Gatewood, Ernestine 6 

GatUn, Gladys 6 

Haddock, Benjamin Holmes 6 

Hagan, OHver"Red" 6 

Hamlin, Lloyd ^ 

Hancock, Stanley B ^ 

Hanson, Lois Janet ^ 

Harrison, Robert J^ 

Hartle, Barbara '> -^^ 1^ 

Hirschberg, Herbert ° 

Hupman, Melvin ^> 1^ 

Hupman, Pearl (Mrs. Melvin Hupman) ° 

Hutchison, John - ^ 

Jacobs, Irene ^ 

Jacobs, Julie ^ 

Jandreau , Leo .^ 

Johnson, William H -^^ 

Kaplan, Louis ** 




Keller, Abraham Charles.. — 21 

Kent, Richard 8 

Kirkcndall, Kerrait 8 

Klein, Joseph 4 

Klein, Lawrence R 17 

Lang, John *> 

Larsen, Kailey A 21 

Linn. Sidney Ifi 

Lohman, Walter 8 

Loutr. Ralph V 14 

Lorch, Lee H 

Mackenzie, John Rodgers 19 

Mahaney, Wilbur Lee, Jr 22 

INIarkland, Lem 8 

Markward, Mary Stalcup 10, 11, 14 

Marqvisee, John Edward 4 

McClaskev, Eugene Kenneth 21 

McGill, Harrv 12 

Mctcaif, Robert M 11 

Mikkelsen, Harold M 17 

Miniard, Marvin M 13 

Mitchell, Johnnv 8 

Moore, Thomas G 19 

Nimmo, James 14 

Nowak, Joseph 5 

Ober, Bebe 8, 13 

Ober, John 13 

Owen, Homer Leroy 18-21 

Owen, Marjorie Jean (Mrs. Homer L. Owen) 21 

Patterson, Leonard 4, 5 

Payne, Forrest 8 

Popps, Louis J 14 

Ravetch, Irviun; 6 

Ravmond, Judith 6 

Redwell, Clinton 21 

Reno, Earl (alias Earl Dixon) .5 

Richardson, Emmanuel Ross 4 

Riley, Vernon Todd 6, 7 

Robertson , Harold 16 

Rumsey , Walter W 6, 7 

Santwire, -Milton Joseph 17 

Schemanske, Stephen J 17 

Secundy , Lou 8 

Shlafrock , Hilda 14 

Simpson , Herbert 19 

Smith, Tony 6 

Stepanchenko, Frank 17 

Strunk, Arthur Paul 7 

Sumner, Merton D 6, 14 

Sunoo, Harold W 21 

Sy kcs , Artie 6 

Taylor, Daniel Pomeroy 6 

Tomargo, Jose D., Jr 14 

Vidal, Raul 14 

Waller, Edwin E 14 

Watkins, John T 6 

Watson, Goldie E 22 

Wereb , Stephen 6 

Wildman, Leonard Basil 21 

Williams, Foster, .Jr 21 

Williamson, Dwight 12, 13 

Witness X 17 

Wollam, Donald M. 19 

Wornstaff , Leothar 9 


Organizations and Publications 


American League Against War and Fascism 5 

Comm unist Party 2 

District of Columbia - 14 

Community Club 11 

Michigan 16 

Oregon 10 

Down River Citizens Committee, Detroit 10 

Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America, United 9 

Local 301 4 

Electrical Workers, International Union of, CIO, Local 301 4 

Ethiopian Defense Committee •5 

Farm Equipment and Metal Workers Union, United, CIO 6 

Farm Equipment Workers of the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine 

Workers of America (FE-UE) 6 

Friends of the Soviet Union... 18 

March of Labor "^ 

M ich igan Worker 1'' 

Mine, Mill, and Smelter Workers of America, International Union of 10 

National Renaissance Party «^ 

Progressive Citizens of America 1» 

Progressive Party of America 1° 20. 

District of Columbia l** 

Ohio - 1^ 

Students for Wallace -- ^^ 

Union Theological Seminary ^ 

Washington Cooperative Book Shop. l^J 

Young Progressi ves